On Saturday 04 August 2007 07:00:42 you wrote: > On 8/4/07, Manu Abraham <abraham.manu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 8/4/07, Michael Krufky <mkrufky@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Manu Abraham wrote: > > > > On 8/4/07, Janne Grunau <janne-dvb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On Saturday 04 August 2007 00:02:29 Manu Abraham wrote: > > > >>> Do we really want to have adapter numbers in DVB bridge > > > >>> drivers ? IMHO, it doesn't look pleasing to have that. > > > >> > > > >> I think it's worthwhile to have it. > > > >> > > > >>> Is there any other possible better alternatives ? > > > >> > > > >> Something similiar is possible with udev rules but I wouldn't > > > >> say that it is a better alternative. > > > > > > > > Why ? If you can achieve the same without any code change, > > > > doesn't that look better ? > > > > > > using a module option to specify adapter number is a _much_ more > > > user friendly solution, as opposed to udev rules. > > > > Yuck. I just wonder why other char drivers in the Linux kernel do > > not have such a necessity, you have the same problem there as well. The video4linux driver have this. > btw, though not directly related this thread on LK deals with the > same root cause > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/2/82 The thread shows why I prefer my patch over a udev solution. 1. The numbers in the kernel log will match the contents of /dev/dvb 2. The patch will handle the replacement of one card with the same type and shuffling of cards in your PCI slots while udev will break one of them. Udev can either identify the cards by path (this will break shuffling of cards) or by ids (mac, usb serial no) (this will break replacement). So I think the patch has its merits. Janne _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
